In this paper, we explore the world’s response to the increasing impact of carbon emissions on the sobering threat posed by global warming: the carbon offset market. Though the market is a relatively new one, it has quickly spawned countless offset providers under both regulated and voluntary regimes. Due to the naïveté of some stakeholders who participate in the market surrounding its rather technical aspects, no common quality or certification structure has emerged for providers. In fact, there are claims to the contrary, that a somewhat ‘cowboy’ atmosphere exists, and that there are “widespread instances of people and organizations buying worthless credits that do not yield any reductions in carbon emissions” (Harvey and Fidler, 2007). At this point in the evolution of the market, only a handful of offset provider ratings schemes exist; and even these systems leave a vast void when consumers seek only to find a means by which to ensure that they are having their intended impact.

The purpose of this paper is, first, to provide a grounded understanding of the nature of the offset market and the ethical tensions that surround it from the perspective of the consuming public. Second, we outline the standards environment for offset providers in order to illustrate most effectively the need for a single set of criteria among providers that is readily understandable by the common consumer stakeholder. We then explore the differences among the providers and articulate the specific criteria upon which providers may be evaluated by this particular stakeholder constituency, by bringing together best practices based on currently available analyses. Finally, we share the results of preliminary data collection in connection with 117 offset providers and highlight early findings. These finding allow us to compare providers effectively and efficiently on a common scale that services both providers, who thereby have greater guidance for self-assessment purposes, as well as consumer stakeholders, who then have the ability to make useful and more informed choices about carbon emission reduction in the future.